Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Egypt’s Sisi: “We are in need of a religious revolution”

The speech that Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi recently made calling for Islamic reform is getting quite a bit of attention, and warrants close examination. Here are the excerpts that Raymond Ibrahim posted here at Jihad Watch a few days ago, with my comments interspersed:

I am referring here to the religious clerics. We have to think hard about what we are facing—and I have, in fact, addressed this topic a couple of times before. It’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire umma [Islamic world] to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world. Impossible!

This is extraordinary to begin with: I can recall no other Muslim leader (political or religious) going back to Ataturk who acknowledged that “the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire umma to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world.” Instead, generally they deny that Muslims have done killed or destroyed, or done anything whatsoever that should cause any anxiety for anyone — or blame non-Muslims for the violence, and claim that Muslims were only responding to extreme provocation.

That thinking—I am not saying “religion” but “thinking”—that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world. It’s antagonizing the entire world!

The distinction el-Sisi makes here is all-important: “I am not saying ‘religion’ but ‘thinking'” — in other words, the problem is not Islamic doctrine, but “the corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years.” Apparently, then, el-Sisi is saying that the problem is not Islam’s sacred texts themselves, but interpretations of them that have become widespread and even mainstream. So apparently he fits into the camp of those who say that Islam properly understood will not give rise to violence, terrorism and supremacism.

Is it possible that 1.6 billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live? Impossible!

I am saying these words here at Al Azhar, before this assembly of scholars and ulema—Allah Almighty be witness to your truth on Judgment Day concerning that which I’m talking about now.

All this that I am telling you, you cannot feel it if you remain trapped within this mindset. You need to step outside of yourselves to be able to observe it and reflect on it it from a more enlightened perspective.

I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move… because this umma is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.

A “religious revolution” that will limit the capacity of Islam to incite violence. This is all to the good. El-Sisi drew back from acknowledging that there is a problem not just in “thinking” but in “religion,” but his statement is nonetheless positive, as a massive reconsideration of violent and supremacist aspects of Islam is indeed much needed. The thing is, if it is undertaken honestly, it will lead not just to a reevaluation of “thinking” (the interpretation of texts) but of “religion” (the texts themselves), and the scholars of al-Azhar and others are almost certain not to allow that. El-Sisi is no doubt aware of that. The fact that he made this speech anyway, and challenged the scholars to find some way forward so that Muslims could live in peace with non-Muslims, is a testament to his courage.

Will the “religious revolution” that he calls for actually come about? The odds against it are prohibitive. But even staking out his position in this way may further enable el-Sisi to act to restrict the power and influence of political Islam in Egypt.

History has proved that the only chance for Moslem progress is to restrict Islam. Ataturk and later the Shah demonstrated that. Trouble is, if you restrict Islam the energy of the belief system builds up and must explode sooner or later. This was seen in Tehran a few decades ago as is coming to fruition in Istanbul now.

For El-Sisi to make a cogent, sustainable argument, he must announce himself to be an apostate and make Islam a felony crime everywhere in Egypt.

There is only less Islam or more Islam. al-Sisi represents less Islam and he has to frame it in the last fallback position of Muslim apologists, blaming “thinking” and interpretation rather than the Qur’an in itself. He cannot be cogent but he can justify less Islam to his audience, the Muslim majority of Egypt,
by blaming the religious clerics for making “innovative” bad ideas mainstream. But it is only the consequences of “antagonizing the entire world” that will make for less Islam…nothing anything within Islam.

Islam is caught in its own trap. It’s like this: Allah is 100% perfect. All His attributes are, therefore, 100% perfect. Everything He commands and whatever comes from Him – Shariah, for example, is likewise, 100% perfect.

But ‘reform’ implies change, in one way or another. But why do you need to change perfection? Any change would, logically, detract from that perfection. Therefore, reform is a bad thing!

No, in the end, someone has to stand up and say that Islam is fundamentally wrong! Non-Muslims saying it won’t attract much attention, but if a highly regarded Islamic figure said Islam was for clowns, which it is, then we’d be getting somewhere.

… as Allah says, Q5:3“… This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion. “

‘… You ask: “Can Islam be reformed?” No, it can’t! To reform Islam you have to first get rid of Muhammad and second get rid of the Quran. … Muhammad (aka Allah) said that he has perfected his religion (Q. 5:3). How can you IMPROVE something, which is PERFECT? …’

It wasn’t to Mohammuds taste ! He added Pepper, Chilli’s and Tobasco !! AHH!! That’s Better !!.
Warmongers Book Now !! He had a bad upbringing and hates everyone and wants the Whole World to Suffer !! “Bitch of an Aunty She was “

Sisi is calling for reform. Reform is ‘new thinking’. New thinking is called ‘innovation’ in Islam. Innovation is ‘bida’ in Arabic. All ‘bida’ is sin. The Islamic clergy have a duty to denounce Sisi for calling for ‘bida’.

When the fatwas start coming, Sisi will realize there is no possibility of reforming Islam. Sisi will become Enemy Number One of the clergy. He will be at risk from his own body guards unless they are all Mormons.

Good idea. Sisi should also ensure that the armed forces are loyal to him, come what may.

There is no doubt that for Islam to be reformed, it has to be from the inside. That is, by a Muslim, who also has the armed forces behind him. This Sisi has for the moment.

External factors are also pushing the Islamic world to reform, as they see the Islamic world collapse due to war waged by the “Crusaders”, internal fratricide (encouraged and financed by the West), collapse of the economy, food shorages etc. Muslims were proimised that they rule the world. What they see is that Islamic world is tearing itself apart, or torn apart, and at the feet of the “Crusader West”, begging for food.

Either way, Islam is finished. If it continues this way, the rest of the world will have run out of patience, and then all bets are off.

If Islam reforms, then it is finished, and Muslims, devout believers in God, will turn to Christianity.

Pleasre pray that God enlightens Egyptian hearts, and they re-join with their Christian brothers and sisters.

Just think, Egypt a Christian country, sending missionaries to Europe to re-Christianize the continent of Europe. First stop, Cologne cathedral.

“The fact that he made this speech anyway, and challenged the scholars to find some way forward so that Muslims could live in peace with non-Muslims, is a testament to his courage.”

Thank you, Robert. Indeed, as Father Zakaria Botros, Islam’s ‘Public Enemy #1′, put it:
“Al Sisi is the man who stood up against the Muslim Brotherhood and liberated the land of Egypt from the rule of the sword, from violence and from terrorism.
We bear witness, and the whole world bears witness that Al Sisi is a man of righteousness, a man of righteousness and justice.
May God protect him and be with him.” (Father Zakaria Botros)

I must also add that, while al-Sisi’s position is a great one, there is something even greater happening here; al-Sisi is backed by 95% of the Egyptian people, the vast majority of which are Muslims.
The real change is not coming from the top, it’s coming from the people, it’s coming from the average Muslim. And *THAT* is good.

Yes, Sisi is truly courageous. He is not a mere power thirsty general, as the dhimmi media have presented him. Evidently, his suppression of the Moslem Brotherhood was motivated by intelligence and spirituality. Best wishes to him.
But, knowing Egypt, and knowing Islam, it is clear (as others have pointed out here) that this attempt to reason with the Al-Azhar clergy is unlikely to succeed for very long. These people. the imams, are not moved by reason but by dark emotions not easily corrected.
Nothing less than a change of religion, a forcible suppression of the insane religion of Islam and all its proponents, will ever work. The ordinary people are completely mentally enslaved to it.

The problem is that the source texts say what they say and can’t really be modified without throwing out the majority of mainstream islamic jurisprudence. What we are experiencing now (9/11, ISIL, whatever) *is* reform – i.e. a return to the texts. That’s the elephant in the living room.

If Islam can really be reformed, that would be great .That would even be wonderful. Nevertheless, the very idea of actually reforming Islam is a fantasy and a day dream. This is because there is nothing good about the real essence of Islam to base genuine reform on. In other words Islam is such thoroughly deceptive and evil religion the there is no actual foundation to start real reform on. As the Bible teaches “That which is crooked cannot be made straight: and that which a wanting cannot be numbered.” Ecclesiastes 1:15. [K.J.V]

As for “reforming Islam” if that means making some kind of “peaceful Islam” the closest this to this would be to have a water-down Islam and not the actual hard core and non-watered -down real Islam that is so very violent and deadly. Would a watered -down Islam be real Islam ? I doubt that.

Sisi is definitely going against the grain. The fact that he has such popularity in Egypt is what is so encouraging. The changes have been dramatic since obola cosigned the coup to overthrow Mubarak and install morsi. The MB was planning to destroy the pyramids!!! And now we hear islamic reform. I’m hoping for the best for Egypt for Israel’s sake as well. I don’t remember Sadat being as popular as Sisi.

Al-Sisi is doing his utmost. It is up to us infidels to do our part by sticking to our guns in constructively criticizing Islam. It our right and duty to ourselves and to good people like Al-Sisi who are trapped in such difficult situations.
Let’s not be afraid to admit that we are antagonized. By doing so, we demonstrate the truth of what Al-Sisi is saying, thereby reinforcing his argument.

Shat Reza Pahlavi employed Henri Corbin as his court mystic. Corbin’s Islam was the best kind: No Prophet, No Koran, No Hadith. Just mystical contemplation and speculation.
No chance of that peaceful ‘Islam’ spreading in the present epoch of takfir (intolerance – a most positive Islamic value).
What Sisi posits is ijtihad, ‘reassessment’ that was outlawed violently 1000 yrs ago across the ‘Ummah, with a jihad prosecuted for typical reason that it was profitable to those preaching intolerance. Perhaps comparable to the rise of Savonarola in Renaissance Florence, who preached the ‘bonfire of the vanities’, the takfiri jihad against those who would take a deeper look into Islam or question anything about the way it is practiced proved a great way to get ahead in politics and finance, as all wealth confiscated from ‘apostates’ went to the biggest and most intolerant bullies (Islam in a nutshell).

If Sisi champions a new wave of ijtihad, he will pay a big price, but will reap a very generous historical legacy (if any of us survive the blowup of the ‘ummah). But we live now in an unprecedented era of instant global communication which is inducing general ijtihad (and better, apostasy from the pernicious creed) anyhow. History is against Islam. but we have to survive its downfall.

Sisi’s position seems close to that of Daniel Pipes. Dr. PIpes, who is a very erudite individual, is of the opinion that there is a good Islam but that it has been smothered by loads of anachronistic and even awful Islamic thinking. For instance, Dr. Pipes believes that much of Sharia is only applicable to 7th-century Arabia. I suspect someone like Zuhdi Jasser is of this opinion too.

Trouble is that:

1) Many, many Muslims don’t agree with what Sisi, Pipes and Jasser are maintaining about Islam and actually think such people don’t understand islam and are insulting this faith.

2) Sharia and Islamic theological schools aside, the Koran alone has one horrible, hate-filled statement after another (e.g., 4:34, 8:60, 9:5, 98:6) and, unlike the Bible, which is not an instructional manual for certain actions for all time (e.g., stoning adultresses), the Koran is (e.g., waging war “until all religion is with Allah” Sura 8:39);

3) All other major faiths do not expect the spritual and secular powers to be inextricably mixed as does Islam——some faiths like Judaism and Christianity take the position that the secular element should be guided by religious doctrines but this if far different from what Islam seeks.

4) Even assuming that some 80-90% of Muslims worldwide would adopt, truly adopt, the ideas of Sisi, Pipes, et al., this would still leave hundreds of millions of Muslims who wouldn’t adopt such positions and thus, in full Islamic mode, Islam will, it must, remain a death cult for a certain percentage of Muslims when they don’t get their way—-about no other major faith can this be said. You see, while virtually all religions, major or minor, threaten some kind of punishment in the NEXT LIFE if one doesn’t believe or do this, that or something else, only Islam threatens (and often carries out) punishment IN THIS WORLD TOO for nor believing or doing blah, blah, blah. So, those 10-20% (and it would almost certainly be higher than this) of Muslims worldwide who don’t adopt the Sisi take on Islam, are going to remain a problem into the indefinite future———-BIG TIME.

5) The character of the reputed founder of Islam is like that of no other major religious or ethical founder—–Mohammed is, quite simply, disgusting—–a psychopath, a pedophile, a bandit, an illiterate, a narcissist, etc. He is not a person who should be admired, let alone regarded as the Model Man. To say Islam, all of Islam, has a problem here would be like saying that Communism has a problem because of the ideas of Karl Marx.

6) Finally, Islam in its structure and ideology is totalitarian in nature—–it simply cannot be reconciled with liberty, equality under the law and a true Goldern Rule for all. Can’t reform a totalitarian ideology. And only one major faith is totalitarian in its theological blueprint and that religion is Islam.

Still, one can admire Sisi for his courage and for his trying. But courage and trying can’t wipe away intrinsic malevolence. And if Islam is not intrisically malevolent, then nothing is.

Al-Sasi is definitely one of the VERY few left alive in the Islamic world that wants to move towards a live and let live policy. The only reason he is still alive to say this is because of a solid military presence around him. I love the way he dealt with the Muslim Brotherhood and I get where he is trying to take Egypt away from, but he’s like the Greek mythology of having to roll that damn rock up the hill and watch it roll back down so he can start all over again.

A few more public announcements like this, and I’m sorry to say even with his military around him he is going to follow one of his predecessors – Anwar Sadat when some fanatic finally gets to him.

What he should do that would be more effective is to borrow Obama’s playbook. Tell them what they want to hear and quietly work behind the scenes to dismantle the Jihadist structure.

Jay,
When Muslims don’t speak up, commentators here will say it shows Muslims condone these violence. When they dare to speak up, they tell them to shut up and work quietly with western leaders behind the scene or that it is just pretence.What is the agenda here ?

Barry K, I’d like to remind you from my comments that Al-Sasi has something very few Muslims who want to break away from the Jihad mentality have – an army. He sure isn’t going to work with Obama because POTUS was one of the first ones to call for a return to power of the Muslim Brotherhood that Al-Sisi worked to remove. Add to that, it’s widely known around the world that Obama favors the MB as evidenced by the public support he continually threw their way. It’s like another commenter already said – Al-Sasi is basically traveling down the apostate to Islam road and we know where that led for Anwar Sadat in making peace with Israel – a body full of bullets. Al-Sasi hates the MB and Morsi in particular, but to repeat – his chances of living the more he speaks out aren’t good. He’s going to need to wait for Obama to leave office if he wants anyone on the U.S. side to sincerely work with. And if Obama does at the end of his office what I think he is going to do – pardon and release the blind Sheik how might head right back to Egypt – that will for sure piss off Al-Sasi the same way someone turning a mad dog loose in your house would.

as Egypt’s president calling for a reformation of Islam made the downfall of Mubarak, and brief disastrous reign of Morsi and the Brotherhood, worth it. Egypt is leading the way to the modernization of the region.

BTW, instead of praising the greatness of Isalm as if it were a misunderstood faith this is the speech Obama should have given when he was at Al Azhar six years ago.

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer. in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to its respectful owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.